rturcic72 wrote:Looking at the stats, we still see sustained superior performance, a Milestone Tour, Joint Progression, and a Masters. So, no major change here, but at a minimum to be competitive for a shot at selection. Based on timing is where we begin to see discriminators like XO/OIC, so about half of the selectees have this or their milestone. Acquisition is a toss up and good; and cyber is a new track to focus on. I would not be surprised if the GC1 AQD for the IDC mid-Career course becomes a discriminator as part of professional development.
Of course a STEM Masters carries some more weight, especially if done off duty, but that depends on the reviewer and the precept. Geographical location should not be a predictor given the fiscal constraints and unpredictable economy we are still under, but I can see it happen. I would ask that if you are in a billet that moves up and right, possibly another milestone or full joint credit, maybe EFM issues occurred in the family, then a letter to the board could easily help to justify this so board members and reviewers understand you are not just doing this because you do not want to move.
The trend that I also see in the stats is that timing and short-touring was a factor for half of the selectees. I dislike using the word "drug deal," but you can see it. If you put on O-4 and lucky to get a milestone off the bat, and then roll into XO/OIC, and the planets align, then you are in there; with good paper naturally. If you go to a three year shore billet, get an EP, cut a deal to leave early to a milestone or leadership job, then you are in there.
Today, we cannot really short tour anymore. One of the reasons can be seen in this cycle, not allowing other Officers the opportunity to move on because someone had already been selected outside of the slating process leading to poor timing and commands unable to adequately man at the O4/O5 levels. It's hard to point fingers because I've seen Admirals override some of these billets with who they wanted putting the Detailer at a disadvantage, or a Detailer used some car salesmanship to make a deal and break a deal.
As an example, if you go to the NAVIDFOR TYCOM, you must do all three years unless you select and then you can move on and out. Then CSG CRC tours are three year tours...now you are IZ. So as a reviewer these are considerations that will need to be taken into account along with good paper, masters, joint, etc.
Another example, my first full cycle FITREP as a new O4 reporting to a staff command was a Flag EP slightly above RSA and above SUM GRP with a great soft and hard break, yet I was not allowed to move on to a milestone, only folks who were already selected at the command left, some to milestones, others more like where the IDC needed them. I wait a year, another Milestone comes up and bam, the milestone list changes, my slate goes away, and the community leader states no more short touring after getting another good full cycle Flag FITREP, new RS and a great average way above RSA. So finally I get screened, but the person I relieve was selected in this O5 cycle and neither one of us were allowed to relieve each other earlier in the last 1-2 years of trying.
This would not happen in the Aviation community. EP...you're moving on so the next group has a shot to slide over. We do not do this very well in our community. In my opinion, the stats and precepts may need to be adjusted to reflect flexible considerations because many folks may be stuck with two full tours and get looked at, then trying to adjust their tours to do XO/OIC and/or possibly cyber somewhere if FOS IZ. But I understand in the end it is performance because I know most of the group selected and some had some limited opportunities, yet made the best of it and performed very well, hence their selection.
There is even some RUMINT, and I take it only as hearsay, that at least one of the selectees went to NJP for using unnecessary excessive force and knocked out an Enlisted Sailor and the Investigator, or someone in the Chain that knew this particular Officer from the Academy, pulled the mark out of their record and brushed it under the rug much to the dismay of several IW Officers that were witness to the event. Unfortunately stuff like this happens, but if I was not present, I can only say what I've heard from several folks within the Wardroom.
Finally, if Congress and the other services buyoff on the Navy moving away from year groups, this could potentially change the promotion environment where HYT would be adjusted allowing for some folks to stay longer in their pay-grade until the board feels they are ready for the promotion and/or shorter because they have what it takes early on. I believe the Marines do something similar, but their Officers promote about a year or so later than we do. It will be interesting to see if this plays out because I'm not sure what this looks like for the IDC, but I believe there will need some considerable buyoff for this.
I'm honestly not sure what points you are trying to make here, other than to let us all know timing matters and you were impacted because of it????
I might sound like a broken record, but read the precept and the convening order. The board members do. And with a good President, they stick to it religiously.
Regarding timing, I have tons of examples where LCDR's were able to complete 4 tours prior to going in front of the board. And I can confidently say 3 is the norm. Even if you are going to a new tour just months prior/after the board convenes.
Milestone tours are 2 years, as are XO. Talk of CSG CRC tours extending to 3 is still talk.
My advice... Live by the IWOL. Look for opportunities and present solutions to the detailer. In other words, detail yourself.
Or, let the system take its course and suffer the consequences...